R1T Max Pack + Dual Motor range update from Rivian: 335, 360 and 400 miles range

[rhumbliner]

Noticed today the configurator states the "standard battery is not available with the offroad packeage"...any thoughts on this?
Are they never going to offer it...perhaps because the different cells dont fit...or is it just so they can move trucks now...given the SR battery not expected til next year?

I suspect that for now, Rivian wants to focus on vehicles with a higher sticker price and thus a higher profit. It’s not likely to be a physical issue with a smaller battery.

Personally, I’m looking to trade my large pack R1T for the dual-motor / max pack R1T when it comes out. Stay tuned — you may be able to pick up a used R1T with 20” AT’s at launch prices.

Sponsored

 

[Supratachophobia]

As another 2+ year max pack reservation holdout my initial reaction was similar to most others who have posted here in being slightly disappointed in the latest stated dual motor/max pack ranges. Yes 400 miles is what was promised and they are delivering that with road tires but so many other factors have also changed over time including the increased range of the Large pack. At the very least I would have loved to see 400 miles of range with the AT wheel setup which to be should be the baseline assumption for this truck.
That said, it feels to me like Rivian is playing a bit of a game right now in that the disappointment most folks have expressed will likely push some reservation holders who have been on the fence into purchasing from the existing shop inventory which is best case for Rivian. I think zipzag is correct in that actual EPA mileage will be closer to 440 which more than justifies the price delta, but given we are still months away from taking delivery of a dual/max pack truck anyway, Rivian is technically delivering on their promised range but also indirectly encouraging all those who are disappointed into switching to a more readily available and more profitable configuration for the company. I’m going to remain optimistic and hold on a bit longer but definitely feel everyone’s frustration on this.

For the hundredth time, look at the R1S. If you assume they aren't making two max pack variants (good assumption for a startup), then you have to take the 390 for R1S as gospel because the marketing people would have killed to be allowed to list it as 400. Which means there's so freaking way there is a 50+ miles difference between S and T because there isn't at the large pack size, ergo max pack isn't 180kwh.

 

[McMoo]

At most it’s a 165kwh pack. So assume 25-30 kWh usable increase at most. It seems like the max pack should have a 65-70 mile range increase from large so that would put it at 415-420. I think they’re being conservative with the estimates unless it’s only 150 kWh pack.

 

[NineElectrics]

A small hope is that the CFO said that power electronics were the primary constraint to production (IIRC). So maybe batteries are not a primary constraint. Also, fewer NMC van builds provides more R1 batteries.

I've heard this too, and I believe them, but I think batteries are right behind, mainly due to articles like this: https://www.autoblog.com/2022/04/24/rivian-ceo-battery-production-constraints-future/?guccounter=1 and the fact that Rivian is a very small automaker.

Further, Rivian's primary supplier is Samsung, but other manufacturers are also using SDI's cylindrical batteries, among them GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Hyundai, Kia, JAC, BMW, and Fiat.

Rivian is going to produce their own batteries, but that will take time to ramp.

 

[pc500]

As another 2+ year max pack reservation holdout my initial reaction was similar to most others who have posted here in being slightly disappointed in the latest stated dual motor/max pack ranges. Yes 400 miles is what was promised and they are delivering that with road tires but so many other factors have also changed over time including the increased range of the Large pack. At the very least I would have loved to see 400 miles of range with the AT wheel setup which to be should be the baseline assumption for this truck.
That said, it feels to me like Rivian is playing a bit of a game right now in that the disappointment most folks have expressed will likely push some reservation holders who have been on the fence into purchasing from the existing shop inventory which is best case for Rivian. I think zipzag is correct in that actual EPA mileage will be closer to 440 which more than justifies the price delta, but given we are still months away from taking delivery of a dual/max pack truck anyway, Rivian is technically delivering on their promised range but also indirectly encouraging all those who are disappointed into switching to a more readily available and more profitable configuration for the company. I’m going to remain optimistic and hold on a bit longer but definitely feel everyone’s frustration on this.

I'm not sure why we think 440. That's true if they deliver 180kwh. They likely won't. This never would have worked in the R1s.

Edit: I see why, but I think theverge is wrong. I'm tempted to e-mail Rivian to confirm.

 

[pc500]

Yikes, 335 miles with 20" Max Pack dual is terrible.

Yeah, it hurts. The reason is part of the range was now gained with efficiency, so the percentage im pact of non-efficient things (IE: A/T tires, max pack, etc) is more.

 

[JamesPolk24]

From my guide:

The Performance Dual Motor will be able to be either configured or purchased afterward as an upgrade.

Which makes it software and not part of the IRS $80k cap.

 

[zipzag]

For the hundredth time, look at the R1S. If you assume they aren't making two max pack variants (good assumption for a startup), then you have to take the 390 for R1S as gospel because the marketing people would have killed to be allowed to list it as 400. Which means there's so freaking way there is a 50+ miles difference between S and T because there isn't at the large pack size, ergo max pack isn't 180kwh.

The battery rack pic I posted shows it to be designed to hold a max pack. In the curent pack configuration that change is achieved by adding two modules to the current nine.

On the rack one of the four bottom clamps isn't even engaged to hold the current large size pack shown.

Rivian has a legacy customer problem with the old R1S max pack holders who switched to R1T when the max was eliminated on the SUV. `It's a bit of a mess because of the signed purchase agreement. If Rivian allowed the switchers to change back to R1S they would lose the tax credit obtained by signing the pre purchase agreement.

So Rivian has some incentive to choose to not announce a 400 mile R1S.

Assuming cells are available Rivian does want to look down the road and stimulate demand through added range. If they were sure they could sell all the R1S they can build for years into the future they would not have added the 390 mile option.

Based on the cart Rivian will build a larger physical pack for the R1T. The question is when.

 

[Yossarian]

I am a hold out since 2018. I am hoping the mileage goes up as well. Otherwise I will jump to and Quad/Large. That could be what Rivian is hoping for in reality.

It worked for Rivian in my case.

I'd like the extra range since I tow a small camper, but am unwilling to switch to the new dual-motor configuration with what is now billed as the Max battery pack that has an uncertain capacity. I recently modified my 2020 R1T Max reservation and will take a chance that the R1S with the Large pack will get 130 or so miles towing my teardrop. If this experiment doesn't work, watch this space for a good deal on a lightly used Rivian SUV.

 

[zipzag]

As another 2+ year max pack reservation holdout my initial reaction was similar to most others who have posted here in being slightly disappointed in the latest stated dual motor/max pack ranges. Yes 400 miles is what was promised and they are delivering that with road tires but so many other factors have also changed over time including the increased range of the Large pack. At the very least I would have loved to see 400 miles of range with the AT wheel setup which to be should be the baseline assumption for this truck.
That said, it feels to me like Rivian is playing a bit of a game right now in that the disappointment most folks have expressed will likely push some reservation holders who have been on the fence into purchasing from the existing shop inventory which is best case for Rivian. I think zipzag is correct in that actual EPA mileage will be closer to 440 which more than justifies the price delta, but given we are still months away from taking delivery of a dual/max pack truck anyway, Rivian is technically delivering on their promised range but also indirectly encouraging all those who are disappointed into switching to a more readily available and more profitable configuration for the company. I’m going to remain optimistic and hold on a bit longer but definitely feel everyone’s frustration on this.

What Rivian sold was increased pack size. Pack size, kWh, are used for camping too, not just range. Rivian chose to sell pack size. Tesla sells range and not pack size.

 

[Dark-Fx]

`It's a bit of a mess because of the signed purchase agreement. If Rivian allowed the switchers to change back to R1S they would lose the tax credit obtained by signing the pre purchase agreement

Binding agreement language just states an R1 vehicle.

 

[zipzag]

Binding agreement language just states an R1 vehicle.

Damn, now I have to consider switching. But I really dislike the idea of hauling around a third row. That R1S third row well originally being max pack battery was perfect.

 

[Bmitch24]

I did notice the range for 20” wheels was decreased on the large pack quad motor too down to 274 from 289.

I am wondering if this isn't a mistake from Rivian or the 274 factors in the RUS. Wasn't 274 miles the original range for the 20's before they updated it to the current EPA 289. The configurator seems to have reverted back to the 274 without explanation. That is a ~5% hit. So maybe purchasing a dual/max with 21s and then putting 20s from the gear shop (or an older R1 a person may be trading in) would net a range closer to 350 miles with the 20s and AT tires. That would also mean 315 for a dual/Large. so the 10k Max upgrade is still only 35 miles, but the top end range number at 350 seems like a better deal than 335.

Here is the current 2023 R1T EPA page for reference. They break out all 3 wheel option here. The 21s and 22s match the EPA site, but the 20s are lower.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Pow...aseModel=R1T&srchtyp=ymm&pageno=1&rowLimit=50

 

[KootenayEV]

If we take the range increases at face value for the 21" wheels at least (since it seems the 20" values are off, based on comments earlier in the thread on mis-match to EPA values), let's look at R1T vs R1S for Dual/Large and Dual/Max.

In other threads, it has been determined that the usable is ~130kWh (of ~141kWh-ish):
For R1T, D/L of 563km = 4.33 km/kWh; implies that D/M ~= 149 kWh (for 644 km)
For R1S, D/L of 547km = 4.21 km/kWh; implies that D/M ~= 148 kWh (for 624 km)

Both are likely to take a slight hit to efficiency with the additional mass, maybe as much as a 5% hit, which implies upper (usable) sizes of 156.5 and 155.5 kWh respectively.

Obviously they are going to be using the same battery pack, so the differences likely come down to rounding somewhere, or other minor errors.

The claim is that the Max pack is "more energy dense", though it is not specified what exactly they mean by that.

They already use a modern cell, so if we go with the typical 3-4% improvement/cycle on existing, that only yields ~135 kWh; so just putting newer cells in the existing module/pack format isn't going to work.

There are 864 cells per module, so if they added the equivalent of one more module, but re-packaged, we would arrive at ~144.5 kWh, which is not enough, but coupled with 4% cell increase, now we are at 150 kWh. Feasible, if the efficiency hit isn't that high from the mass of adding 1 module.

Easy math says it is 2 modules which equates to 159 kWh, which is the in the ballpark.

But the elephant in the room for both of these is the (almost) fact that the R1S and R1T will have the same Max pack, and the R1S frame doesn't allow to simply add 1 or 2 more modules.

Leaves three possibilities in my mind:
1) They somehow cram another module in a location other than between the frame rails on the R1S - the immediate issue I see with this is that it couldn't (easily) be integrated into the thermal management system
2) They re-package the pack entirely to fit in additional cells (Dark-Fx took a stab at this idea here) - this seems the most likely to me, as a few months ago when we found out the Max pack definitely isn't 800v, there was discussion from Rivian around how there are changes for the Max pack (other than the obvious, that it has more capacity)...
3) A real wild idea: they create a stretch R1S that rides on the same frame as the R1T.

 

[zipzag]

3) A real wild idea: they create a stretch R1S that rides on the same frame as the R1T.

I like the crazy. But that vehicle would not be called the R1S.

Sponsored